who does the 2nd amendment refer to?

Question

The 2nd amendment refers to "the right of THE people" (a group) to keep and bare arms, not to 'the right of people' (individuals)....it refers to the right of the States as a way to protect themselves from the new power of a federal goverment. People did not think of themselves as Americans then, they thought of themselves as New Yorkers or Virginians, Carolinians... etc.

the 1st amendment refers to the right of the people to assemble...naturally "the people" refers to a group since one person cannot assemble. and the 5th amendment does use the word "people" at all. so it seems the "the people" in the 2nd refers to groups...the states

Answer 1

According to many court rulings, including the supreme court, who the second applies to and it's actual purpose is apparant in the first phrase of the single sentence amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ". Says it all folks regardless what the NRA would have you believe.

Answer 2

It says "the right of the People to keep and bear arms" and the meaning of the word "People" does not change from one amendment to the other. The other amendments (1,4,9, and 10) all refer to the "People" and in those amendments it means the citizens of the US.
And this is what constitutes the militia in the US:
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
..........

So yes the 2nd Amendment gives us (THE PEOPLE) the right to keep and bear arms.

EDIT: For those who say the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to the PEOPLE please give the case citation so the rest of can be as enlightened as you.

Answer 3

Back in the late 18th century, the "militia" was every able-bodied man. If you were a citizen, and not frail or otherwise incapacitated, you were a militia citizen by default.

And, folks could own firearms. The founding fathers laughed at the Europeans for not intrusting their own citizens (or is it serfs?) with that freedom.

It may take a "well regulated militia" to keep the federal government in check, and for that to be possible, the "Right of the People to Keep and Bear arms" should probably not be infringed.

Now think for a moment, what would be the purpose of the 2nd Amendment and its inclusion in the Bill of Rights for there to be any other meaning.

It's clear enough to me.

Answer 4

That question has been boxed around for a long time.The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has stepped up and said that it is the individuals right to have weapons.
They made the interpretation that "the people" of the Second Amendment were the same as "the people" of the First Amendment and the Fifth.
To me,it is the part of the Constitution that allows me to have guns,knives and any other sensible weapon.
The city of Washington DC has appealed to the Supreme Court.The question is not undecided,it is simply in contention.
For you scholars out there--as I suppose the asker to be--read Washington's Farewell Speech.
In the first sentence he refers to the United States,not Virginia.He also slammed sectionalism and made note of how the North helped to strengthen the South and vice-versa.
No one part could claim to have it all.
What is the point of having a United States if it is to be each state as a power unto itself?

Answer 5

At the time it was written I believe it did pertain to the states to keep up their militias. Now, let us define the militia as it was understood by the founding fathers.... The militia of the individual states was made up of citizen-soldiers. These volunteers would spend some time, generally very little, each year drilling. If needed for defense of the STATE, they would be called upon to fight. The most important thing in this is that the citizens generally PROVIDED THEIR OWN WEAPONS. The minutemen for example did not run to the state armory first, they grabbed their gun next to their bed and went to fight. This interpretation is fine as long as the individual retains their firearm, and the state maintains control of the militia. Today, however, militias have changed... they are more organized and disciplined, they rely on the government for weapons, and are under the control of the federal government (ie. the federal government's orders override the state's). This leaves the power in the hands of the federal gov't, not what the framers intended. The militia of old, was seen as a way the states could fight and defeat the federal gov't if it became abusive of its power. With the change in definition of militia, it becomes vitally necessary for individual citizens to possess firearms in order to ensure a free society.

Answer 6

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Lets take apart for sec start with regulated militia, being nessary to the security of a free state: OK we need a militia for protection.

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms" seems to be telling me that people have a right to bear arm.

Here is the catch "shall not be infringed."


No for those who want guns to be taken away for whatever reason in my mind are barking up the wrong tree.

Don't say we need more laws about guns because we do have a ton of them what we need is enforcement of what is on the books.

At Columbine how many laws did those two break? Do you really think a few more would have made them say. Hmmmmm that is against the law I better not.

Here is a read for you if you dare:
More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws (Studies in Law and Economics) by John R. Lott Jr.

He has done his homework on gun control and you maybe surpised at some of the answers he has come up with.

Answer 7

This is a good question.
I guess it comes down to the one and only real question you have to ask yourself when the government breaks down and the corrupt officials use the police as their own goon squads and the military are used to make empires, and crush individuals rights to freedom of thought, word, and deed, and they come knocking on your door in the middle of the night,
Does that Second Amendment mean I can have a gun or any firearm to protect me and my family from a perpetrator, or not?
I believe that the you really know the answer and that this is a redundant question when the invader comes to your house to TAKE what ever they wish, by force! You will become a Patriot, and protect yours and my freedom from Tyranny.

That is why WE (the People, as in YOU and I) have the right to Keep (in your possession) and Bear (shoulder the weapon) Arms (gun and ammunition). And that is regardless of what ever a lawyer sitting in a court bench says or has ruled.

Answer 8

As currently interpreted by most federal circuits, (other than the 5th Circuit and the DC circuit), it refers to the rights of states to have state militias that are armed, not to an individual right of private citizens.

A lot of people disagree with that interpretation, but it is the current law. And it's based on the fact that Article I Section 10 prohibits states from "keeping troops", but Section 8 refers to state militias. Under the collective rights interpretation, the 2nd Amendment was to clarify that having an armed state militia is not the same as "keeping troops".

Many people, plus the 5th and DC circuits, treat it as an individual right, same as right to free speech.

But either way, it's important to remember that it only applies to FEDERAL regulation of firearms (not state gun control laws), because (like the 7th Amendment) the 2nd was never incorporated against the states.

Answer 9

it refers to me

Answer 10

It even says "a well regulated militia....."